‘Innocent extension mistake’ costs couple £100k
Family forced to demolish building after being given planning permission but not actually owning land
A COUPLE have been ordered to demolish a £100,000 extension which had planning permission after it emerged that the land did not actually belong to them.
Wayne and Natalie Noke, were given planning permission to begin work on their £2.1 million eight-acre home in the New Forest last summer.
However, they have been forced to abandon the project after Forestry England (FE), division of the Forestry Commission, threatened legal action.
The couple, who bought the five-bedroom home and accompanying cottage in the village of Bartley, in Hants, in August 2021, were told the land they were building on was “Crown land”.
Mr and Mrs Noke had bought the home and grounds along with Mrs Noke’s parents – Michael and Catherine Drummond – in what was a “dream” scenario that would see them all live close together.
The couple had gained planning permission for an extension on the cottage to provide a living space on the ground floor for Mr Drummond, 80.
The family claim neither they nor their solicitor knew that not all of the land was theirs. But in September, officials from FE visited the family and said the cottage has a strip around it on three sides that does not belong to them.
A licence for use has been in force since 1983 preventing other people using it but it does not permit the Nokes to build on it.
The couple insisted they only learnt of the land’s real ownership in a subsequent letter sent by FE as the licence had not been included on the title deeds.
Work has now been halted amid fears they will have to tear down the oak frame and slate roof.
The couple, who run a haulage company together, hope an agreement can be reached via a land swap, purchasing the land, or by changing the terms of the licence to allow them to build on it.
About 90 per cent of the New Forest, which was established in 1079 by William the Conqueror, is owned by The Crown. FE manages around half of the national park.
Mrs Noke, 53, said: “It’s a house we’ve known for many, many years and we were fortunate enough to be able to buy it and have my parents in the cottage.”
She admitted it was a “dream” scenario to have her parents nearby, but wanted to help maintain her father’s independence by building an extension, which meant he didn’t have to climb the stairs.
The proposal was granted permission by New Forest National Park and work began last summer.
However, in September 2023 the couple received a letter from FE which informed them the extension they were building “was partly on Crown land”.
Attached to the letter was a copy of a licence which informed the homeowners the “land around the cottage” was owned by FE.
Mr Noke said that neither their solicitors nor the previous homeowners were aware of this licence as it is not on the title deeds.
Mrs Noke, 53, said: “I know ignorance isn’t an excuse, but there wasn’t anything we were told about that made us aware of it. We have made an error in innocence, it’s a genuine mistake.
Mrs Noke said that because of the project being abandoned her father is living in their lounge, so he can access a toilet without having to go upstairs.
“Our thing is, if there are possible options, however lengthy, who is gaining from hauling it down?” she said. “The fence is still there, people won’t be able to use the land.
“What are they gaining by insisting we take it down? If we had done it on purpose, then I’d get it.
“I just feel we are in such a different position to that: can we find a way around it with humility.
A spokesman for FE said: “We have been in discussion on this matter with Mr Noke directly and via legal representation since the very early stages of the building work.
“The issues focus on building carried out on Forestry England land designated and protected as part of the New Forest. Whilst these discussions are ongoing we can’t provide further comment.”
‘I know ignorance is no excuse ... we made an error in innocenc ... a genuine mistake’
‘What are they gaining by insisting that we take it down. If we’d done it on purpose, I’d get it’